Supply Chain Data vs. 13F Holdings: Ownership and Business Exposure

Key findings

• A hypothetical 6% Micron and 4% SK hynix portfolio with no Nvidia shares has a 2.1724% selected Nvidia customer-exposure indicator.
• That indicator does not create Nvidia ownership and should never be added to a disclosed Nvidia security weight.
• Security-to-company mapping and historical relationship dates are required before external customer exposure can be calculated consistently.

Supply chain data and 13F holdings data reveal different kinds of exposure. Holdings identify securities owned by a reporting manager. Supplier and customer relationships identify commercial dependencies of the underlying businesses. Joining them can show that a portfolio depends on a company it does not own, but that commercial exposure must remain separate from security ownership.

Consider a hypothetical account with 6% in Micron, 4% in SK hynix and zero Nvidia shares. The displayed Altsets estimates associate Nvidia with 17.62% of Micron revenue and 27.88% of SK hynix revenue. Weighting those customer shares by the two allocations gives a selected Nvidia customer-revenue exposure indicator of 2.1724%. Direct Nvidia ownership remains zero. The indicator neither creates a synthetic Nvidia position nor measures expected portfolio loss.

That example explains the incremental information a relationship dataset supplies. A holdings comparison can find common securities across managers; the combined dataset can also find different securities selling to the same buyer. To make the result auditable, preserve the filing's ownership fields, resolve each security to its economic company, attach a dated relationship snapshot and report unmatched or unquantified coverage. The graph cannot make an incomplete or delayed holdings disclosure complete or current.

What each dataset can actually establish

Form 13F is a securities disclosure, not a commercial ledger. The SEC's current Form 13F FAQ location supplies the disclosure context. A relationship estimate should not be represented as an additional field reported by the manager.

Keep the ownership result beside the exposure indicator

The hypothetical calculation is 6% times 17.62% plus 4% times 27.88%, giving 2.1724%. It weights two company revenue shares by account allocations. The rest of the account is unspecified, so it is a selected indicator rather than a complete portfolio dependence estimate.

Store the Nvidia security holding separately from the customer-linked result. An analyst should be able to see zero direct Nvidia shares, two commercial supplier routes and the available measurement coverage at the same time. Adding the indicator to a Nvidia position weight would combine unlike objects and create ownership that the filing never disclosed.

The shared-customer screen develops the portfolio-weight calculation. Here the central question is the join between datasets, including what must remain outside that calculation.

Resolve securities to companies before traversing the graph

A local listing, depositary receipt or share class is a security record. Commercial relationships attach to businesses. Preserve the original security identifier for prices and valuation while linking it to a durable company entity for supplier and customer analysis.

If two listings represent the same company, aggregate their account weights for the company-level indicator before counting counterparties. Otherwise one business can appear as two independent suppliers. A fund holding requires an underlying-security look-through before company relationships can be applied; a fund name is not an operating-company node.

Keep unmatched securities visible. Excluding them silently can make a partial graph look like full account coverage. The foreign company-to-security mapping guide explains the distinction across share classes and markets.

The reporting period is not the information cutoff

A historical holdings filing joined to today's supplier and customer network answers what the old portfolio looks like through today's commercial information. It does not reproduce what was observable when those securities were held, or when the filing first became available.

For a historical study, keep the holdings period, filing availability, relationship snapshot and strategy decision cutoff distinct. A later filing cannot be used at an earlier decision simply because its reported positions relate to that earlier period. Likewise, today's customer edge cannot select a historical supplier basket merely because old prices exist.

The point-in-time backtesting guide specifies the historical input rules. For current monitoring, the external-company watchlist uses the combined map to identify companies outside the account that deserve attention. Both uses depend on preserving the difference between a security the manager owns and a customer the owned business depends on.

Sources

• Altsets supply chain dataset
• SEC Form 13F frequently asked questions
• Nvidia fiscal 2026 Form 10-K

Related research

• Find Stocks Exposed to the Same Customer: A Nvidia Supplier Screen

• Portfolio Supply Chain Concentration: Internal Links vs. Outside Overlap

• Build a Portfolio Watchlist of Companies You Do Not Own

• SK hynix Has Greater Nvidia Exposure Than Micron

Methodology

Read the methodology for this research.

Cite this research

Altsets Research. "Supply Chain Data vs. 13F Holdings: Ownership and Business Exposure." Published September 18, 2026. https://www.altsets.com/research/supply-chain-data-vs-13f-holdings

Copy citationCanonical URLMethodology